| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Harry Hope" |
| Date: |
07 Apr 2005 09:47:29 PM |
| Object: |
Rightards and their "Liberal" media are caught with crap in their pants |
http://mediamatters.org/items/200504070005
Dissecting a right-wing smear:
How conservatives used trumped-up evidence to blame Democrats for
Schiavo memo
Despite a lack of evidence, several media sources have repeated
conservative speculation and accusations that Democrats secretly
authored a "talking points" memo that described the Terri Schiavo case
as a "great political issue" for Senate Republicans.
These baseless accusations, apparently hatched on right-wing blogs and
in conservative media such as The American Spectator, were given
credibility by The Washington Post and CNN's Inside Politics.
But as recent reports indicate, Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL) has admitted
publicly that one of his aides is the true author of the memo.
As "evidence" for their claims that the Schiavo memo was a Democratic
"dirty trick," conservative blogs such as Power Line and media sources
pointed to the fact that the memo was "unsigned" and not on official
Senate letterhead.
In another posting on March 22, Power Line suggested that the memo was
"suspicious" because it "mix[ed] political strategy points...with
talking points for Senatorial argument.
On March 23, Michelle Malkin repeated the "evidence" touted by Power
Line, and suggested that spelling errors in the memo also raised
questions about its authenticity.
In a March 23 post to his blog on the National Review's website, Jim
Geraghty also repeated the "evidence" that appeared on the Power Line
blog, and stated that "creepy phrases" in the memo indicate that the
memo was written by a dumb GOP operative or a "Democratic dirty
trickster."
Similarly, in its March 24 "Washington Prowler" column, The American
Spectator echoed the same so-called "evidence" and stated, "It's
Rathergate all over again."
On March 30, The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz reported on the
controversy surrounding the memo.
Kurtz apparently relied on the so-called "evidence" put forth by Power
Line and the Spectator to reach the conclusion that "there are several
strange things about" the memo:
While there is no hard evidence that the memo is fake, there are
several strange things about it, including the basic fact that no one
seems to know who wrote it and that the noncontroversial part of it is
lifted from a Republican senator's press release.
Kurtz failed to indicate why it was "strange" that part of the memo
was lifted from a press release by the senator who had co-sponsored
the Schiavo legislation and took a leadership role in its passage.
In hindsight, of course, it is perfectly clear why the Schiavo memo
included text from Martinez's press release.
It is also perfectly clear why "no one seem[ed] to know who wrote it"
-- those responsible for the memo were, unsurprisingly, keeping their
involvement secret.
Finally, on April 6, The Washington Times published a front-page
article titled "Was the Schiavo memo a fake?" that used a formal
survey of Senate offices as "evidence" for questioning the
authenticity of the Schiavo memo.
Armed with this so-called "evidence" -- that the memo had
typographical and spelling errors, was not printed on Senate
stationary and had passages pulled from a Republican senator's press
release, as well as the fact that Republican Senate offices were not
rushing to take responsibility for a highly controversial and widely
denounced memo -- conservative commentators took to the airwaves and
the Internet to suggest that the Schiavo memo was, in fact, a
Democratic dirty trick.
Syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh pointed to a Democratic
"opposition research office" and stated:
"Apparently the explanation is it was forged! The memo was made up by
Democrat staffers."
On NBC's The Chris Matthews Show, Tucker Carlson stated:
"I think within a week or two it will become clear that it -- that
memo -- was a forgery, possibly written by Democrats on the Hill in an
effort to discredit Republicans."
Executive editor Fred Barnes even wrote in the Weekly Standard that
this was another case of liberal media bias:
So rather than an example of aggressive reporting, the memo story
turns out to be yet another instance of crude liberal bias, in this
case against both Republicans and those who fought to have Schiavo's
feeding tube restored.
___________________________________________________________
Awwwwwww. That mean ole badass party pooper, Martinez. Off with his
head.
Harry
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Rightards and their "Liberal" media are caught with crap in their pants |
07 Apr 2005 11:42:23 PM |
|
|
Harry Hope wrote:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200504070005
Dissecting a right-wing smear:
How conservatives used trumped-up evidence to blame Democrats for
Schiavo memo
Despite a lack of evidence, several media sources have repeated
conservative speculation and accusations that Democrats secretly
authored a "talking points" memo that described the Terri Schiavo
case
as a "great political issue" for Senate Republicans.
These baseless accusations, apparently hatched on right-wing blogs
and
in conservative media such as The American Spectator, were given
credibility by The Washington Post and CNN's Inside Politics.
But as recent reports indicate, Sen. Mel Martinez (R-FL) has admitted
publicly that one of his aides is the true author of the memo.
As "evidence" for their claims that the Schiavo memo was a Democratic
"dirty trick," conservative blogs such as Power Line and media
sources
pointed to the fact that the memo was "unsigned" and not on official
Senate letterhead.
In another posting on March 22, Power Line suggested that the memo
was
"suspicious" because it "mix[ed] political strategy points...with
talking points for Senatorial argument.
On March 23, Michelle Malkin repeated the "evidence" touted by Power
Line, and suggested that spelling errors in the memo also raised
questions about its authenticity.
Spelling errors suggest it was a Democratic source???
Has Malkin forgotten, it's the Republcians who are ignorant, can't even
pronounce "nuclear", thought the aluminum tubes were for centrifuges
even when NUCLEAR EXPERTS told them that could not be the case.
Repubulicans, intellecutally, are like children.....
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
